public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joost Jager <joost.jager@gmail•com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Standardisation of an unstructured taproot annex
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2023 17:00:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJBJmV-L4FusaMNV=_7L39QFDKnPKK_Z1QE6YU-wp2ZLjc=RrQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1953 bytes --]

Hi,

As it stands, the taproot annex is consensus valid but non-standard. The
conversations around standardization seem to be leaning towards the
adoption of a flexible Type-Length-Value (TLV) format [1]. There's no doubt
that this approach has considerable potential. However, settling on an
exact format may require a significant amount of time.

In the interim, the benefits of making the annex available in a
non-structured form are both evident and immediate. By allowing developers
to utilize the taproot annex without delay, we can take advantage of its
features today, without the need to wait for the finalization of a more
lengthy standardization process.

With this in view, I am proposing that we define any annex that begins with
'0' as free-form, without any additional constraints. This strategy offers
several distinct benefits:

Immediate utilization: This opens the door for developers to make use of
the taproot annex for a variety of applications straight away, thus
eliminating the need to wait for the implementation of TLV or any other
structured format.

Future flexibility: Assigning '0'-beginning annexes as free-form keeps our
options open for future developments and structure improvements. As we
forge ahead in determining the best way to standardize the annex, this
strategy ensures we do not limit ourselves by setting its structure in
stone prematurely.

Chainspace efficiency: Non-structured data may require fewer bytes compared
to a probable TLV format, which would necessitate the encoding of length
even when there's only a single field.

In conclusion, adopting this approach will immediately broaden the
utilization scope of the taproot annex while preserving the possibility of
transitioning to a more structured format in the future. I believe this is
a pragmatic and efficient route, one that can yield substantial benefits in
both the short and long term.

Joost

[1] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1381

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2110 bytes --]

             reply	other threads:[~2023-06-02 15:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-06-02 15:00 Joost Jager [this message]
2023-06-03  1:08 ` David A. Harding
2023-06-03  1:14   ` Greg Sanders
2023-06-03  9:14     ` Joost Jager
2023-06-03 15:50       ` Peter Todd
2023-06-15  9:36     ` Joost Jager
2023-06-15 10:39       ` Greg Sanders
2023-06-16 11:26         ` Joost Jager
2023-06-16 13:30           ` Greg Sanders
2023-06-18 20:32             ` Antoine Riard
2023-06-18 20:40               ` Greg Sanders
2023-06-19  1:14                 ` Antoine Riard
2023-06-20 12:50               ` Joost Jager
2023-06-03  7:49   ` Joost Jager
2023-06-03  8:06     ` Joost Jager
2023-06-03 12:05       ` Greg Sanders
2023-06-03 12:35         ` Joost Jager
2023-06-03 12:43           ` Greg Sanders
2023-06-03 12:55             ` Joost Jager
2023-06-08  9:16 ` Joost Jager
2023-06-10  0:23 ` Antoine Riard
2023-06-10  7:43   ` Joost Jager
2023-06-10 22:09     ` David A. Harding
2023-06-11 19:25       ` Joost Jager
2023-06-12  3:16         ` Antoine Riard
2023-06-13  8:51         ` David A. Harding
2023-06-13 10:38           ` Joost Jager
2023-06-12 13:03     ` Greg Sanders
2023-06-20 12:30     ` Joost Jager
2023-07-04 20:18       ` Antoine Riard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAJBJmV-L4FusaMNV=_7L39QFDKnPKK_Z1QE6YU-wp2ZLjc=RrQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=joost.jager@gmail$(echo .)com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox